I have yet to see Rohl’s videos. I am, however, aware of some of his proposals. I’ll be commenting your summary instead since you seem to want to present a case for the Exodus and for a New Chronology also.

On the Israel Stele: I’m sure you’ll find some scholarly opinion that argues that ‘Israel’ here stands for a group of people. Neither a kingdom, nor a nation. This view is based on the reading of hieroglyphs, which unfortunately I can’t. I also can’t seem to tell what “laid to waste” means in this new perspective. If (dates are for illustration only) we assume that Ramses II invaded Jerusalem in 925, we should expect him to become king around 932. This in turn would place the beginning of Merneptah’s reign around 865. This corresponds to the first half of the reigns of Ahab and Jehoshaphat. Israel can’t be described as ‘laid in waste’. But I don’t want to build a straw man here. Do you have access to Rohl’s books or articles? I’ve read many articles by him and about his chronology online but haven’t read him on this.

You wrote: “(…) the Pharaoh who raised Moses was likely Sobekhotep IV (who is also Kha-nefe-re. Artapanus, 3rd or 2nd century BCE, who is quoted by others, wrote that this Pharoah in Greek is called Khe-noph-res) and that the Pharoah of the Exodus was likely Dudimose”

Any attempt at identifying the Pharaoh of the Exodus seems sterile to me. The Book of Exodus couldn’t be any more obsolete in identifying this king or his predecessor were. I don’t think later authors such as Artapanus and Josephus knew more either. Any attempt at naming those two monarchs relies solely on ancient Egyptian kings lists and mathematics, which is exactly what later authors such as Artapanus and Josephus did. It’s exactly what we still do to this very day.

You wrote: “Avaris is the city that was discovered buried under the ruins of Rameses (…). There were also graves of babies in much higher percentage than is normal (50% versus 25%). In regards to adult graves, there was a much higher percentage of women to men..... thus showing a correlation to the biblical story of the Egyptians killing the firstborn Israelite male babies.”

You seem to be taking many leaps here. To what time period do these graves belong to? Have all or at least most of the babies been shown to be Israelites? Was the Pharaoh killing women as well? I am not aware of these said graves but if this is so and they belong to the time of the Hyksos, one can come up with much simpler explanations. Maybe women who died during childbirth were being buried with their babies. Maternal death or death by post-partum complications were common in the ancient world.

You wrote: “There is also the statue with the red hair and multicolored coat next to a small burial pyramid which had been exhumed, hence no body.... yet most grave robbers take the loot but leave the body. This corrolating to the biblical story where Joseph asked that his body be taken back to Canaan. In this same plot were a total of 12 burial graves.. the other ones were not pyramids. 2 of them contained amazing 'daggers' correllating to Simeon and Levi.(Gen 34:25)”

Seems like an oddly specific situation. Yet I ask: what is the provenance of this statue or of this tomb? Is Joseph evidenced in Genesis to have red hair? Does it belong to the time before the aforementioned graves? How certain can you be that the body was taken to Canaan and not reburied in somewhere else by some unknown reasons? Also, I fail to see the significance of 12 burial graves. Is it implicit that these are the graves belonging to the ancestors of the 12 tribes? Was Joseph buried with his brothers but not with his close descendants? What about Asenath, Manasseh or Ephraim?

You wrote: “(…) that the Pharaoh who made Joseph second in command was likely Amenemhet III who named a canal after Joseph, ie. ''Buck Joseph'”

You certainly mean Bahr Yussef, in Fayyum. It was originally called Moeris by the Greeks. It was named Bahr Yussef by the Arabs, not Amenemhat III.

You wrote: “David Rohl shatters the cornerstone used in dating Egyptian Chronology, namely the equating of Pharaoh Shoshenq”

Ramses II has a point in his favor which Shoshenq I doesn’t have, which is an attestation of Jerusalem as one of his conquests. However, Jerusalem might have fallen from the Bubastite Portal at Karnak, as the inscriptions don’t survive in their entirety. If you allow Shoshenq V to die around 730 (Kitchen’s date) or 720 (my preferred date), you have to take Pasenhor’s genealogy into account and have a King Shoshenq nine generations earlier. I won’t argue here whether this King Shoshenq is Hedjkheperre Shoshenq or not, but on normal human generations (around 25 to 30 years per generation, perhaps a bit lower), you’ll see that a King Shoshenq must have lived around the late 10th Century, exactly the time period where we’d expect a King Shishak to invade Jerusalem.

Of course, you could adopt Rohl’s option here for the placement of Shoshenq V, which I believe is to overlap the latter with the mid period of Psamtik I’s reign, c.630 BCE. Rohl, however, uses a very low margin for generations which allows him to place Shoshenq I in the late 9th Century. I believe he dates Shoshenq I to c.820 but I could be wrong. I found his chronology available without much detail once on a Creationist site, but I can’t seem to find it anymore. Whatever the case, any number of years below 200 for 9 generations doesn’t seem reasonable for me.

You wrote: “This wall lists the place by place, in order, conquest route of Shoshenq into Canaan. The next stop, after 'the hand of God, is 'aruna', which is a long way from Jerusalem..... and Jerusalem isn't mentioned in Shishaq's wall. This is important, because the scriptures say that Shishak attacked Jerusalem”

We don’t know whether Shoshenq I went on one campaign only or how long it (or they) lasted. Because Section Two of the Bubastite Portal has not survived in its entirety, we can’t be certain about whether Shoshenq I actually came across Jerusalem later on or not. I concede ambiguity here but not total denial of his passage through Jerusalem.

You wrote: “Further, the route of Shoshenq (from his wall relief) is vastly different than that of Shiskak (in the Bible)”

The biblical account only mentions the presence of Shishak in Jerusalem. From reading 1 Kings or 1 Chronicles, we don’t know how he got there nor do we know where he went.

The pet name is Sesi, or Sisa, which Rohl believes came to be written and read by the 7th Century BCE, in Hebrew, as Sysq. He is not alone, however, as James et. al use this precise argument to bolster their case for Ramses III as Shishak. Many others have argued against this on linguistic grounds.

You wrote: “Rohl's new chronology explains the descrepancies which modern day archeologists have with Jericho. This involves with the archeological trough dug by the famous Katherine Kenyan which she identified the various layers into layers like Late Bronze Middle Bronze IIa etc. The 2 structures there (a house and the older city itself) are dated, and there is a big gap in between.”

What I find most appealing about new chronologies is how they tend to close these gaps, thus making ancient history seem to flow much more naturally. Current historical reconstructions need to impose dark ages and gaps on archeological records. Although these gaps can not be directly proven we do know of similar gaps on more recent strata related to pre-modern and modern history. In a nutshell, gaps can happen.

You wrote: “The bottom line, is that archeologists claim that by the time Joshua got to Jericho, the city had already been destroyed. But now, with the new chronology, this problem is solved.”

But is this an actual problem? You seem to build your support of Rohl on the premise that the Book of Exodus is historically accurate but this is demonstrably not so. To bend the archeological record to fit the biblical narrative seems like circular reasoning to me.

You wrote: “Rohl also examines the ruins of Hazor and the Migdol fortress of Shechem ---- Joshua's conquests. In hazor is found, at the pertinent archeological strata/level, a tablet bearing the name Yabni-addu which is the Jabin in the Bible whom Joshua himself killed with a sword.”

Yes, Rohl seems to hit the jackpot a lot of times when it comes to equate biblical and other mythical figures with historical names. I can't tell, however, if Jabin and Yabni-addu actually correspond to the same name.

Even if this said stone could be proven to be the stone associated the one Joshua placed, it only means that the biblical authors and editors thought the stones were the same, not that it was the actual stone. Myths tend to be associated with places and objects. It’s a way people find to euhemerized traditions or to account for something extraordinary or eerie in the surrounding environment. See Mount Ararat and Noah’s Ark, or Niobe and the Weeping Rock in Mount Sisyplus.

Greetings,, Kudos to the agnostic David Rohl for recognizing the Bible as an accurate history book. Sort of recently he has made youtube lecture videos with and been interviewed by the fim maker Tim... more

Hi Toby, Re: Rohl, Let's start at the end, point #6. Hazor. First there is a possibility that Yabin in a dynastic name or repeated family name. Note from the book of Judges that Yabin appears later... more

Hello Anonymous, The J(Y)abin inscription was found at a level and age corresponding to that matching the time of the conquest. You: "Jericho; Kenyon's date is ca. 1550 BC. To early for Ramesses. "... more

Hi Toby Could you please stop posting the same message to multiple groups/forums. For example you have posted this “Sothic Dates for Egyptian Pharaoh's” to at least also the NewChronology and the... more

Hi Toby When I started posting to lists some 20 years ago it was common etiquette not to crosspost. As for Rohl. I came across his book “A Test of Time” (paperback edition) back in the mid 1990’s at... more

Greetings Joe, Fascinating background you have. Are the Cambridge Ancient History 'booklets' your favorite read? Thanks for footing the bill to this discussion group. Thoughtful. You might consider... more

Jaime wrote: "The pet name is Sesi, or Sisa, which Rohl believes came to be written and read by the 7th Century BCE, in Hebrew, as Sysq. He is not alone, however, as James et. al use this precise... more

//You’ll find many critics of Rohl and James who agree with you. I disagree with the proposal on grounds other than linguistic. Anyway, if you wish to read more on the matter to fully understand the... more

Hello Jaime, Good discussion. You wrote: "Toby: I appreciate your comments on the Israel stele. However, it doesn’t answer my question to you: what could ‘laid in waste’, or ‘devastated’, mean in... more

Hello Toby, Before anything else: forgive me for the delay aaaaaand… I messed up!! Rohl’s dates for Merneptah are a bit higher, about 875. See the Wikipedia article I sent Marianne. I was working on... more

Jaime, many thanks for distinguishing the work of myself and colleagues (Centuries of Darkness) from that of a.n.other. The latter's so-called "New Chronology" is utterly impossible: Egyptian NK... more

Hello James thank you for the reply. It's always nice to read something from you, even though we stand on opposite sides of the chronological debate. On the city of Salem - yes, it does seem like it... more

Good to see you still active. I have read a couple of your more recent peer-reviewed papers and have been impressed at how your ideas and research have matured over the years. I no longer believe... more

Hello Jaime, You have no need to apologize for any delay. The collegiate has the busiest schedule in life. Thanks for the fine discussion. I regret to say that I must bow out of this discussion at... more

Hi Toby At least we got to tackle some points. Maybe we will continue this discussion somewhere else, some other time. I can already tell the Israel stele and the Karnak relifs will intrigue you,... more

"The Merneptah stele, aka 'Israel' stele, written by Merneptah, claims Egypt laid Israel waste. But does Merneptahclaim that he did it? ....or does this stele recount instead, all the victories of... more

Jon wrote: "The Merneptah stele, aka 'Israel' stele, written by Merneptah, claims Egypt laid Israel waste. But does Merneptahclaim that he did it? ....or does this stele recount instead, all the... more

Faulkner's dictionary is a good place to find where Egyptian words are attested. "fk" is given by Faulkner as "be empty" and the source he gives there is the Leiden Papyrus, "The Admonitions of a... more

Hello Jon, Me: "The Merneptah stele, aka 'Israel' stele, written by Merneptah, claims Egypt laid Israel waste. But does Merneptahclaim that he did it? ....or does this stele recount instead, all the... more

Toby, you wrote: "Ramesses, Merneptah's ancestor was likely the Pharoah that laid Israel waste. He has a relief on the Mortuary Temple at Karnak showing that. It has Egyptian and Israelie Chariots in ... more

Toby wrote: "BTW, I KNOW that according to Conventional Egyptian Chronology, the chariot battle with ISrael couldn't have occured. The only way this relief makes sense is if Rameses lived 250 years... more

Jaime wrote: Marianne wrote: “This [Ramses = Sesi = Sysq] as a "cornerstone" for a theory makes no sense whatsoever. Neither in the Hebrew or Egyptian languages have I ever heard of a custom of... more

Hello Jaime, Marianne, I made a short video showing how the 'W' in shishaw (Ramesses birth name) became a Q in ShishaQ. I think it shows it better than the pic in the wiki website you gave Jaime. The ... more

Toby: "I made a short video showing how the 'W' in shishaw (Ramesses birth name) became a Q in ShishaQ. I think it shows it better than the pic in the wiki website you gave Jaime. The glyphs for the... more

Marianne, You: 'OMG--you obviously don't know anything about this.' and in the earlier posting: 'As long as there are people like you around, he'll keep writing them.' Since you are acting hostile, I ... more

Toby: You: 'OMG--you obviously don't know anything about this.' and in the earlier posting: 'As long as there are people like you around, he'll keep writing them.' I meant people that, due to lack of ... more

And here is another thing. You can't shift the time line of ancient Egypt in a radical fashion without running into problems presented by primary sources. For example, Thutmose III always left on his ... more

Hello Marianne, You wrote: "And here is another thing. You can't shift the time line of ancient Egypt in a radical fashion without running into problems..." I ---think--- you are under the wrong... more

Toby wrote: " I ---think--- you are under the wrong impression. Rohl was not suggesting shifting the Egyptian Timeline. Rohl was suggesting shifting the Hebrew Timeline." Who asked him to? Is that... more

Hi Marianne, You: "Who asked him (Rohl) to? Is that the business of someone involved with Egyptology? I hardly think so." ...asked....business Are you suggesting that research should only be done is... more

Toby wrote: "Are you suggesting that research should only be done is someone is asked or paid? I hope you're not implying that... for there are much better motivations such as the desire to find out... more

Since you are questioning Rohl's licensing, here it is: "In 1985 Rohl became the first Director of the Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences (ISIS), and editor of its Journal of the... more

Toby. You forgot to mention Rohl was a rock musician in the early 1970's. Ok, all joking aside, are you seriously interested in archaeology? I take it you follow Rohl's theories, but what about... more

And--oh--when it comes to Dynasty 19, everything is accurate because a new Sothic Cycle begins. Things will be even more accurate than they were in the previous Dynasty. Sothis will really rise in I... more

Hello Jaime Well, here's a partial reply.... more to come later... Jaime wrote: On the Israel Stele: I’m sure you’ll find some scholarly opinion that argues that ‘Israel’ here stands for a group of... more

"If Merneptah’s campaign as described in this inscription is mapped out, the most likely location for the ‘Israel’ referred to here is in the central hill country." That all depends on where Yenoam... more

"The next stop, after 'the hand of God, is 'aruna', which is a long way from Jerusalem..... and Jerusalem isn't mentioned in Shishaq's wall. This is important, because the scriptures say that Shishak ... more

Toby wrote: "Below is my summary" Just briefly: "1. that the Egyptian Chronological timeline moves down. Ramesses II (circa. 1304-1236??? or 1279–1213???) of the 19th dynasty, instead of being the... more

Marianne wrote in her reply to Toby: "This [the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus] has been discussed many times here. This is a searchable site." Anonymous II here: Yes, this is a searchable... more

Anonymous wrote: 'Marianne wrote in her reply to Toby: "This [the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus] has been discussed many times here. This is a searchable site." No, I specifically referred to ... more

In my post I wrote: "Marianne wrote in her reply to Toby: 'This [the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus] has been discussed many times here. This is a searchable site.'" Marianne wrote: "No, I... more

Hello Marianne, You wrote: "Equating Ramesses II with Shishak is based on absolutely nothing credible." Sound's like you've studied all the evidence including that presented by Rohl. I request that... more

Toby wrote: "Hello Marianne, You wrote: "Equating Ramesses II with Shishak is based on absolutely nothing credible." Sound's like you've studied all the evidence including that presented by Rohl." I... more

Hello mariAnne I asked you to back up your statement. You made the statement the burden of proof is on you. I would be more than glad to provide the details as to why rohl argues that ramsesses birth ... more

"I request that you refute Rohl's evidence in some other manner than just giving your opinion." Toby, the Assyrian chronology demonstrates the inadequacies of Rohl's Egyptian chronology. It was... more

Hi Toby, you wrote: "Rohl is not arguing against the synchronisms between Assyria and Egypt. Nor is he arguing for or against the few synchronisms between Assyria and Israel. Rather, he is arguing... more

Hi Jon, Toby wrote: "Rohl is not arguing against the synchronisms between Assyria and Egypt. Nor is he arguing for or against the few synchronisms between Assyria and Israel. Rather, he is arguing... more

"Rohl is NOT condensing the Egyptian Timeline. You don't understand." Rohl is moving a Late Bronze Age Pharaoh 300 years forward into the Iron Age. I use to be a member of the New Chronology forum, I ... more

Hello Jon, Me: "I request that you refute Rohl's evidence in some other manner than just giving your opinion." You: Toby, the Assyrian chronology demonstrates the inadequacies of Rohl's Egyptian... more

Correction--Eusebius did mention some more detains about the agricultural contributions of Joseph: "(1) Artapanus says, in his book Concerning the Jews, that Joseph was a descendant of Abraham and... more